“Per our policy for deceased users, we have memorialized this person's account. This removes certain more sensitive information and sets privacy so that only confirmed friends can see the profile or find the person in search. The Wall remains so that friends and family can leave posts in remembrance.”
Although I agree with the policy and think that, in most cases, it is generally good - friends can grieve by posting on the wall, the profile acts as an account of their life that will live on for friends and family to see - it’s the insensitivity of Facebook that makes a chill run down my spine. No matter the privacy statement, never is it completely all encompassing. In such a situation like this, when a relative can’t view the page because they are not yet friends and when the daughters don’t like having to look at a thumbnail picture of their dead father, Facebook should circumvent their default regulations and bring a little humanity back to a world awash with faceless corporations.
I think this particular situation is only the spear-point of a general trend towards internet sites becoming so awash with problems because of their size and their importance to the daily lives of so many people that they have to refer to corporate default positions that lack even a flicker of humanity.
My thoughts are echoed over at TechCrunch on an article about the recent Facebook TOS controversy.
Posts
I think that remembering a friend or relative who has passed away is a great idea, but I don’t think that keeping their Facebook profile alive is quite the way to do it. It is nice to have a place to write goodbyes and memories, and so on, but I think that would be better suited for a group created specifically to remember the person who has died. I’m part of a group that remembers an old high school classmate who passed away during my first year and I think that is the best way to remember someone we have lost. This way friends and family can grieve together without having to look at his profile and all the things he did while he was still alive. There should be some way to remember those we have lost without having to be constantly seeing that someone has written on their wall. That would be too upsetting for some of his or her friends. Being a part of a group enables us to check back once and awhile to see what others have posted and perhaps post something of our own. It is not a constant presence, which may be too difficult for some people to handle. Sites such as these are growing so much and are such a huge part of our lives that I think it is going to take time for all these various issues to get sorted out. Facebook is trying, but I think they still have a ways to go.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kstar. Though people grieve deaths in their own ways, and therefore are welcome to do so in anyone, but I believe that it should be the choice of the family as to whether they wish to keep the account active or to have it deleted. I agree, and that if the family of friends so choose they can create a memory group for that person to share their memories, stories and photos. As we discussed in class, facebook and similar internet sites allow people to create an online profile. This is where some people become obsessed with updating their online profile, such as their interests and photos to share with friends. It is like an artificial world.
ReplyDeleteOn a lighter note, even with simple things as relationships, when two people break up - it is hard enough to see that person's facebook profile and updates on the news feed. I know you can still delete the contact from your friends, but if you have mutual friends - you can still see their pictures and other information. All in all, facebook should bend the rules in these cases, there can always be exceptions to rules.